Ballot Type: Computer
Submitted: Oct. 13, 2025, 10:05 a.m.
Overall Rationale: I used a metric I created to assess the quality of each win or loss, assigning points based on opponent strength (FPI), margin, adjusted margin (Bill Connelly’s Post Game Win Expectancy), and home/away with bonus points for a win. This week, the composite ranking is 55% strength (FPI) and 45% resume (Quality Score)
Rank | Team | Reason |
---|---|---|
1 |
![]() |
|
2 |
![]() |
|
3 |
![]() |
|
4 |
![]() |
|
5 |
![]() |
#4 FPI, #7 resume. Overly penalized by humans for 2 close losses to elite teams |
6 |
![]() |
|
7 |
![]() |
|
8 |
![]() |
|
9 |
![]() |
|
10 |
![]() |
#17 resume but #7 FPI brings it up several ranks |
11 |
![]() |
#9 FPI and #14 resume, should have been higher all season |
12 |
![]() |
|
13 |
![]() |
|
14 |
![]() |
|
15 |
![]() |
#12 FPI and #18 resume. No clue why human voters are so high on a team whose best win is at home against Tulane. Bad win against Wazzu is effectively the same Quality Score as a loss. |
16 |
![]() |
|
17 |
![]() |
|
18 |
![]() |
|
19 |
![]() |
|
20 |
![]() |
|
21 |
![]() |
|
22 |
![]() |
|
23 |
![]() |
|
24 |
![]() |
|
25 |
![]() |
Teams Ranked:
Rank | Team | Unusualness |
---|---|---|
1 |
![]() |
0.03 |
2 |
![]() |
0.00 |
3 |
![]() |
0.00 |
4 |
![]() |
0.14 |
5 |
![]() |
1.75 |
6 |
![]() |
0.65 |
7 |
![]() |
0.00 |
8 |
![]() |
-1.20 |
9 |
![]() |
0.00 |
10 |
![]() |
3.12 |
11 |
![]() |
1.07 |
12 |
![]() |
0.94 |
13 |
![]() |
0.80 |
14 |
![]() |
0.00 |
15 |
![]() |
-4.20 |
16 |
![]() |
0.00 |
17 |
![]() |
-0.10 |
18 |
![]() |
-0.31 |
19 |
![]() |
-0.51 |
20 |
![]() |
4.82 |
21 |
![]() |
0.00 |
22 |
![]() |
0.00 |
23 |
![]() |
0.00 |
24 |
![]() |
1.16 |
25 |
![]() |
0.00 |
Omissions:
Team | Unusualness |
---|---|
![]() |
2.97 |
![]() |
1.02 |
![]() |
0.76 |
![]() |
0.33 |
Total Score: 25.86